> I see what you mean, so something along the lines of just:
>
> tc bind dev swp0p0 queue 0 master queue 16
>
> without having to specify the master network device since it's implicit,
> I kind of like that.
Yes, that is better.
Andrew
On 09/01/2017 11:50 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:27:43AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 09/01/2017 10:55 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> Hi Florian
>>>
>> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
>>>
>>> It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementatio
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:27:43AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 09/01/2017 10:55 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Hi Florian
> >
> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
> >
> > It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementation just
> > use something like netdev_master_
On 09/01/2017 10:55 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Florian
>
tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
>
> It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementation just
> use something like netdev_master_upper_dev_get('sw0p0')? Or does
>
> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev lo queue 16
>
Hi Florian
> >> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementation just
use something like netdev_master_upper_dev_get('sw0p0')? Or does
tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev lo queue 16
make sense?
Andrew
On 09/01/2017 06:29 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I suppose that you could somehow use TC to influence how the traffic
>> from host to CPU works, but without a "CPU" port representor the
>> question is how do we get that done? If we used "eth0" we need to
>> callback into the switch driver for programm
> I suppose that you could somehow use TC to influence how the traffic
> from host to CPU works, but without a "CPU" port representor the
> question is how do we get that done? If we used "eth0" we need to
> callback into the switch driver for programming..
We need to compare how the different swi
On 08/31/2017 05:05 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:18:44PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> This patch series is sent as reference, especially because the last patch
>> is trying not to be creating too many layer violations, but clearly there
>> are a little bit being create
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:18:44PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> This patch series is sent as reference, especially because the last patch
> is trying not to be creating too many layer violations, but clearly there
> are a little bit being created here anyways.
>
> Essentially what I am trying
This patch series is sent as reference, especially because the last patch
is trying not to be creating too many layer violations, but clearly there
are a little bit being created here anyways.
Essentially what I am trying to achieve is that you have a stacked device which
is multi-queue aware, tha
10 matches
Mail list logo
